Some results from Larry with finalized Beta

[Father]

Hello Pedro
As a dream, I would like like a human to play the Rybka 3 running its in a top hardware.
Best,
Pablo

[George Tsavdaris]

Hello Pedro
As a dream, I would like like a human to play the Rybka 3 running its in a top hardware.

This time no wins for you. They have a special surprise for you as they've said.

Actually it's a setting that would deal with the lag problem there is, as also other time related problems where time disappears, so Rybka won't lose on time.
The question is if you can now take a draw from Rybka 3 with the Rybka 3.ctg book. And if yes, out of how many games?

[David Dahlem]

may be the book has its +50-100 elo, don't you think?

No. As Uri said this is wrong for these amazing results, since as Larry(he is the one who did the tests) said he used the HS200 set, with each opening played twice (alternating colors).

Is this HS200 set available for download? If so, where can i find it?

Thanks
Dave

[bob]

Results as of this morning, they are still being updated:

I now have what is supposed to be the final Rybka 3 engine (not GUI), except perhaps for cosmetic things and any bug fixes. I'm running test matches with opposing programs and with Rybka 2.32a mp. All tests are on my two quads and one octal. I'll report results here generally when they reach 100 games.

First result: Rybka 3 vs. Rybka 2.32a mp on octal, game/1': after 106 games, +54=43-9 for +157 Elo.
Update: now +98=61-15 for +180 Elo (!).
Update: now +136=76-19 for +193 Elo (!).
Final: +151=83-22 for +192 Elo.

Second result: Rybka 3 vs. Rybka 2.32a mp on quad, 40/1' repeating: test stopped with score +47=24-7 for +196 Elo (!!).

Third result: Rybka 3 vs. Zappa Mexico II on quad, 40/1' repeating: +59=36-7 for +195 Elo.
Update: +64=41-9 for +182 Elo.
Final: +85=46-11 for +200 Elo.

Comment: It seems that the much better time management helps much more against other Rybkas than against unrelated programs. Do not expect anywhere near a 200 Elo gain over 2.3.2a against programs unrelated to Rybka.

Fourth result: Rybka 3 vs. Hiarcs12 on quad, 40/1' repeating: test stopped after 100 games at +72=23-5 for +282 Elo.

Fifth result: Rybka 3 vs. Naum 3.1 on octal, 40/1' repeating: test stopped after 100 games at +76=22-2 for +330 Elo (!!).

Comment: overnight I'm switching the Naum and Hiarcs tests between machines, in case Naum has some problem utilizing octal computer. Results in the morning (US).

Sixth result: Rybka 3 vs. Deep Shredder 11 on quad, 40/1' repeating: +61=21-6 for +254 Elo. Will run overnight.

I think we could call this a Quantum Leap, wouldn't you agree? The numbers speak for themselves. Pretty devastating for now when you view it from the competition's side... But in the longer run I think this is good for computer-chess. Congratulations to Larry, Vas, Jeroen and all other members of the Rybka team!

Eelco

Correct me if I am wrong, but the numbers he is giving is not _improvement_. For example, the result against Naum simply says rybka 3 is 330 elo _better_ than naum. But I didn't see any results with previous rybka against same opponent so that it is possible to see the improvement...

[Uri Blass]

Results as of this morning, they are still being updated:

I now have what is supposed to be the final Rybka 3 engine (not GUI), except perhaps for cosmetic things and any bug fixes. I'm running test matches with opposing programs and with Rybka 2.32a mp. All tests are on my two quads and one octal. I'll report results here generally when they reach 100 games.

First result: Rybka 3 vs. Rybka 2.32a mp on octal, game/1': after 106 games, +54=43-9 for +157 Elo.
Update: now +98=61-15 for +180 Elo (!).
Update: now +136=76-19 for +193 Elo (!).
Final: +151=83-22 for +192 Elo.

Second result: Rybka 3 vs. Rybka 2.32a mp on quad, 40/1' repeating: test stopped with score +47=24-7 for +196 Elo (!!).

Third result: Rybka 3 vs. Zappa Mexico II on quad, 40/1' repeating: +59=36-7 for +195 Elo.
Update: +64=41-9 for +182 Elo.
Final: +85=46-11 for +200 Elo.

Comment: It seems that the much better time management helps much more against other Rybkas than against unrelated programs. Do not expect anywhere near a 200 Elo gain over 2.3.2a against programs unrelated to Rybka.

Fourth result: Rybka 3 vs. Hiarcs12 on quad, 40/1' repeating: test stopped after 100 games at +72=23-5 for +282 Elo.

Fifth result: Rybka 3 vs. Naum 3.1 on octal, 40/1' repeating: test stopped after 100 games at +76=22-2 for +330 Elo (!!).

Comment: overnight I'm switching the Naum and Hiarcs tests between machines, in case Naum has some problem utilizing octal computer. Results in the morning (US).

Sixth result: Rybka 3 vs. Deep Shredder 11 on quad, 40/1' repeating: +61=21-6 for +254 Elo. Will run overnight.

I think we could call this a Quantum Leap, wouldn't you agree? The numbers speak for themselves. Pretty devastating for now when you view it from the competition's side... But in the longer run I think this is good for computer-chess. Congratulations to Larry, Vas, Jeroen and all other members of the Rybka team!

Eelco

Correct me if I am wrong, but the numbers he is giving is not _improvement_. For example, the result against Naum simply says rybka 3 is 330 elo _better_ than naum. But I didn't see any results with previous rybka against same opponent so that it is possible to see the improvement...

It is possible to compare with ccrl results against the same opponents
The opening choice may be different and the time control is also different(40/4 against 40/1) so the comparison is not perfect
but both played from fixed opening positions.

Larry used openings that are used by part of the cegt testers.

http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040.l ... 4-bit_4CPU

[George Tsavdaris]

may be the book has its +50-100 elo, don't you think?

No. As Uri said this is wrong for these amazing results, since as Larry(he is the one who did the tests) said he used the HS200 set, with each opening played twice (alternating colors).

Is this HS200 set available for download? If so, where can i find it?

Actually it was HS220, which is Harry Schnapp's 220 test suite and you can downloaded it from here:
http://americanfoot.free.fr/echecs/hsbook.htm

[David Dahlem]

may be the book has its +50-100 elo, don't you think?

No. As Uri said this is wrong for these amazing results, since as Larry(he is the one who did the tests) said he used the HS200 set, with each opening played twice (alternating colors).

Is this HS200 set available for download? If so, where can i find it?

Actually it was HS220, which is Harry Schnapp's 220 test suite and you can downloaded it from here:
http://americanfoot.free.fr/echecs/hsbook.htm

Thank you very much George.

Regards
Dave

[Albert Silver]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the numbers he is giving is not _improvement_. For example, the result against Naum simply says rybka 3 is 330 elo _better_ than naum. But I didn't see any results with previous rybka against same opponent so that it is possible to see the improvement...

You are not wrong.

Albert

[fern]

Ah, great; finally I will face an opponent with some chance to win me in 10 moves...

Fernando

[pedrox]

Agreed, I've always been against games at such time controls and think that the results are very random compared with longer time controls.

Is the time control the problem?
You should know that a time control of:
•40/1' on a OCTAL computer as this Rybka played here is equivalent(roughly) to:
•40/40 on a Pentium III 1000MHz of before some years(around 2000).

Were the games that we played with 40/40 control in 2000 random?

Even worse:
This 40/1' on a OCTAL computer as this Rybka played here is equivalent(roughly) to:
•40/120 on the Pentium 90Mhz we had at 1996.

Were the games that we played with 40/120 time control in 1995 random?

What you have to understand is the time control is irrelevant.
And if you say that all 40/1' games on an OCTAL of today are pointless and random, then you should accept that ALL the games in ALL time controls of the past, before 2000 or so, were pointless and random!

Also, note that the difference to Zappa Mexico isn't as amazing.

This result.....:
Rybka 3 vs. Zappa Mexico II on quad, 40/1' repeating: +85=46-11 for +200 Elo.
.....isn't such amazing??

Oh well you are right, it's not +700 ELO but only +200....

I do not agree that you can compare games in 40/1 with a octal and games 40/40 on a Pentium III.

We have also played chess with the 286, 386, 486, pentium, pentium II, you think that 40/40 on a 486 is to comparet 40/1 on a Pentium III?

In the computer's memory no only has 2 processes when your running programs and SO (antivirus, explorer, net, sound...), there are many more and I am sure that this affects longer the results in bullet, if a process is involved is not the same as it does in a control system long that short, therefore I believe that the quality of 40/40 on a Pentium III is greater than the octal in a 40/1, although the depths reached on the programs are similar.